In people-without-clothing news, some nudity in a Shakespearean production is causing quite a stir—but it might not be what you think. The much-heralded production of King Lear starring Ian McKellen has been taped and will be broadcast next January on PBS. In the production, McKellen has a full frontal nude scene and PBS chief Kreger will not yet answer whether or not the scene will be edited for television. The issues inherent in this story and the caginess with which it’s being dealt bring up a number of key questions.

Obviously, there are the myriad of issues surrounding nudity, both on stage and in film. Some argue that it can be artistic while others firmly believe that on some level it is always exploitative. Secondly, there is the PBS angle. Fifteen years ago, the network found itself in the midst of a similar controversy over the similarly-praised Tales of the City(which ironically also feature McKellen in a small role), a miniseries which also featured male actors dropping trou. PBS met with much criticism for airing the program and the two sequel miniseries moved to Showtime (where mature content is de rigueur).

Underneath it all, however, is an unspoken question. Would either of these arguments have happened (even with PBS involved) if the nudity featured was of a female actor? Instead of arguing about whether or not it is appropriate (which will yield a different response depending on whom you ask), we should ask whether this issue is treated the same way across the board. In Shakespeare, as elsewhere, the answer seems to be no.

Cardinal Rule #1 when it comes to rehearsals and props…Don’t touch the props unless they are yours!  If Petruchio is supposed to carry out a plate of prop food, then he gets to touch said plate and said prop food.  Does a Servant get to touch that plate?  No.  How about Vincentio?  No.  What about Grumio, who is, after all, Petruchio’s servant, and really, Mrs. Bogut, wouldn’t he be the one to actually touch the plate and prepare it for Petruchio, since he is, after all, Petruchio’s servant, which I think I mentioned earlier?  No. But what if Grumio is a member of the props crew…nay, the props manager himself? Okay, you got me there!

So, I have a props crew. Next to a stage manager, I would have to say that a reliable, mature properties crew is one of the most important bodies of workers that a director needs. If you try to rely on everyone to just make sure they know where their props are, something (or many somethings) will get lost or not be in the right place at the right time. In addition, the director, without a props crew, will be the one hauling props all over kingdom come (if you’re doing your production in the park, away from your normal storage space), setting them up, then looking for the props when they sprout legs and leave. Directors and potential directors…You will NEVER have time to deal with this, so please get a reliable props crew.

Also, when choosing a properties manager and crew, stick with your older students - those who can drive! Last year I had a good crew of students helping with props…but only one of them had a driver’s license, and he didn’t have a car (and couldn’t drive mine because he couldn’t drive a manual). So despite the fact that they were willing to get the job done, I was still having to drive them everywhere, transport props, etc., which didn’t save me any time (although it was a hoot to go shopping with them!). You might have some great 13-14-or 15-year-olds to help with props, but if none of them can drive, you’re still going to be doing a TON of work.  Besides the simple logistical fact of who can drive and who cannot, your older students are more likely to be the mature ones who will follow directions, and hopefully not be chucking prop food at each other backstage (no guarantees on that point, by the way!)!

Once you have your props crew, train them how to set the props out and have them ready for your actors to grab (you know, those that are allowed to grab the props!!!). One of my books suggested that you have a long table set backstage, covered with either white paper or a white sheet that can be written on, taped securely to the table. You then divide it into sections with a marker for each act or scene, clearly labeling the sections with “ACT I,” “ACT II,” or “ACT I, scene 2.” Once you have the sections labeled, place each prop in its correct section of the table, then draw around each prop with the marker, creating an outline of the prop. Then label the outline – “Dressmaker’s bill (Kayla),” or “Hortensio’s harp (Christopher),” including the character’s name, the item, and the actor’s name. If your play uses a large number of props, you may have to have two tables. Get this worked out with your props manager prior to dress rehearsals so that the actors get used to where to grab their props and where to put them back when they’re finished.

But will your actors always remember to put their props back in the precise little outlines your props crew has created for them? Of course not! The actors are nervous and excited, possibly hyperventilating, so it really isn’t, ultimately, their job to remember to put their prop back in its exact place…that’s why you have a props crew! Remind your props crew of this fact. They should never get angry with a cast member who accidentally leaves his/her prop sitting on the floor…they should gently remind the cast member not to leave props where someone can trip over them or break them, but this isn’t an issue of disciplining and reprimanding - this is an issue of working together as a team for the common good of the production. If you, as the director, train your props crew well, and they, in turn, help train the cast as to where things go (and what NOT to touch), your production will be all the more successful and fun for all involved!

So, where do you find props? Well, if you’re a nutcase who was involved in a medieval reenactment society for 12 years, then you might actually have a lot of good items laying around your house (yes, I’m referring to myself). If, however, you’re starting from scratch, definitely check Goodwill, Salvation Army, and other thrift stores in your area. You will be amazed at what you can find that will go with whatever time period and locale in which you’ve set your play.  I had really good luck last year at our local Ross, finding all sorts of interesting chairs, candle holders, etc., that looked very Italian, which is also coming in handy for this year.  Try to go as generic as you can, though, so that your props can be reused in future productions.  And yard sales…don’t forget the yard sales!  Baskets make great props, and I’ve been able to find lots of fun baskets at yard sales, for some reason.

And finally, if you need to purchase prop food (some people have fake fruit as decorations in their house, and if they’re willing to loan it to you, super!!!), I suggest www.amazingfakes.com and www.decorcentral.com - Not only did I find the medieval meat pie pictured above, but I also found some great looking bread items, fruit, and vegetables, and even a historical Pilgrim dinner. Pilgrim dinner? Why a Pilgrim dinner, you may ask? Well, I needed to have meat that Petruchio flings around the stage during his temper tantrum (Act IV, scene 1), but the prop turkeys and hams were quite expensive.  Instead I was able to get two authentic Pilgrim dinners, complete with sliced venison, turkey, cod, and even mussels and oysters, for less than either the complete turkey or the ham.  And it’s probably going to be safer to have Petruchio chucking slices of venison, rather than whole hams!

It’s no secret that film and television actors often return to the stage in order to work on their craft or simply recapture the experience of working in front of a live audience. Shakespearean productions are particularly alluring because of the perceived credibility boost they give said actors. Gone is the stigma attached to doing stage work. The hierarchy used to be film, television, and then stage work. Now actors move easily among all three forms based on where the interesting projects lie.

The city of Boston has seen a flood of actors from the still-booming cable series pool arrive in Beantown to perform Shakespeare in Boston Common. A few years ago, Jeffrey Donovan of the hit series, Burn Notice, gave Hamlet a shot. This summer, audiences will be able to catch Frederick Weller of the new (and popular) show, In Plain Sight. While some actors might veer toward the tragedies because of the implied gravitas (like Donovan in Hamlet), Weller will be tackling one of the male leads in the comedy As You Like It.

Weller has the added benefit of being relatively new to mainstream audiences. While he has worked steadily in film, television, and on stage, he is the type of actor audiences are most likely to recognize by face rather than by name. The benefit of this is fans can assess his work in Shakespeare on its own merits, without any tabloid tales cluttering their viewpoints. All of that might change, however, if In Plain Sight continues on for numerous seasons.

A New Hampshire production of Othello is upping the ante on high-concept interpretations of Shakespeare. First, it transposes the action of the play into the world of street gangs. Othello’s power is rendered far grittier and less noble in this variation on the play. More importantly, several of the key roles have been refashioned as female characters. The villainous Iago is not only played by a woman, but as a woman as well (by default the character also becomes a lesbian, due to her relationship with Emilia).

You could argue that these two very intriguing concepts could merit separate interpretations. A gangland Othello is loaded enough even without the sex/gender elements thrown in. This milieu ups the race card as gang membership is often drawn along racial and cultural lines. Still, to play devil’s advocate, you could argue that the play is dangerously close to courting stereotypes. Does the only major black character in Shakespeare have to be portrayed as a thug?

The sexual politics are also full of potential. Audiences fatigued by seeing every Othello staged as a statement about racism may find it refreshing to see issues of gender and sexuality featured so prominently. Since Desdemona, like Ophelia, is too often given a wan, whiny interpretation (let’s hope this production is the exception), making Iago a woman gives Othello a fierier sparring partner. It also enriches the role of Emilia, which in some ways is a better part than Desi. Whether or not this Othello can successfully juggle everything on its very loaded agenda, it earns high marks for originality.

Something’s Rockin’ in Denmark is not a joke. I swear. In fact, the play enjoyed a very brief run on Broadway over thirty years ago. The play has recently been revived and, yes, it is a musical version of Hamlet. The temptation to snicker at this kind of adaptation isn’t as easy to do as it once was. Last year, Spring Awakening, a century-old German expressionist play was turned into a Good Charlotte-esque rock musical and walked away with the Tony award. Still laughing?

Plays of the past, it seems, are the new future. Ultimately, though, does Something’s Rockin’ in Denmark say more about the state of Shakespearean theatre or musical theatre? Addressing the former, it seems that artists are constantly striving to find new ways to interpret and reimagine these works. Musical theatre is a logical option in this light, particularly because it provides the opportunity to further explore the musicality of the text itself.

The statement this makes about musical theatre, however, may be even more telling. As Spring Awakening attests, there is some backlash to the increased commodification of Broadway musicals. Does every Disney cartoon need to be made into a musical? While I understand the need for family entertainment, shouldn’t there be pieces that speak to other age groups/demographics as well? Also, no matter how successful it is, no matter how many reality shows they build around it, Legally Blonde: The Musical is garbage—a perfectly obnoxious concoction based on a mediocre film that misogynistically celebrates stupidity as some kind of twenty-first-century female empowerment. I don’t blame writers (and audiences) for demanding more gravitas in musicals. If the melancholy Dane wants to sing, I’m all ears.

Loving the earth has become trendy. With the turning point being former Vice President Gore’s 2006 documentary, An Inconvenient Truth, the past two years have seen the green movement go global. Now, recycling is for sissies. That’s not green; it’s simply expected. If you’re hardcore about the environment, you’re remodeling you car, your house, and your life. Like any zeitgeist, the movement has also had an impact upon theatre, including Shakespeare festivals. One festival has even incorporated a green tie-in to their season by asking audience members to pledge personal ecological change.

Last fall, a host of network television shows incorporated environmental issues into their plotlines (Mr. Gore even made a cameo). It seems that Shakespearean productions could be taken in a similar direction—and some already have. The Tempest has always been the go-to play to talk about the environment because of the whole man-trying-to-control-nature thing. Prospero could be seen as a representative for humankind and its hubristic desire to dominate, control, and exploit the natural world. The play has frequently sparked thematic explorations of slavery, and the notion of the enslavement of the natural world certainly creates a parallel.

The Tempest also makes a good fit because of its structure. Like many late Shakespearean works, it is a multi-genre work whose eclectic nature make it easy to graft different ideas onto it. In this light, we can view the finale as Prospero’s renunciation of his manipulation of the environment. It also helps make sense of his eleventh-hour decision to let his duplicitous captives live. Despite the ills these men have wrought upon him, Prospero in the end decides to recycle them.

A new show, dubbed Shakespeareance, has taken the tried-and-true approach of assembling a collection of Shakespeare’s greatest hits. In this production, a group of five actors perform selections from Shakespeare’s greatest works. In each scene, the context has been given a modern twist to make it relatable to modern audiences. Thus, the famous balcony scene featuring two soon-to-be-doomed lovers now takes place via cell phone. Another monologue is performed with a Barbra Streisand-esque accent. Most arrestingly, a scene from The Taming of the Shrew is redone as a kind of western.

So, in trying to keep an open mind about different approaches to Shakespeare, let’s evaluate the benefits and drawbacks of some of these conceits. While I have no problem with Shakespeare being performed in an all-purpose American accent (some find it too flat), I think using regional American accents is a smart compromise to lure those who can’t imagine Will’s words spoken without a British cadence. The Bard-by-way-of-Babs New York accent and the southern accent implied by this particular take on Shrew both allow regional accents to bring out new elements in the rhythmic flow of the text. Furthermore, a western Shrew sounds like a hoot. This is a play that often succeeds in broader, larger-than-life interpretations.

As for the cell phone usage, I could seeing it work as a gag (though gag may precisely what purists do when confronted with this symbol of 21st-century obnoxiousness in the midst of their favorite tragedy). However, the balcony scene hinges on intimacy and face-to-face contact. How can we invest in a love story forged in Anytime Minutes?

I’m such a moron…I just have to say this because I did not do the one thing I said was critical to any director’s sanity and well-being…I did NOT procure a stage manager. But, come on…how bad can it be? I mean, good grief, what exactly is a stage manager?

Well, according to theater.about.com, a stage manager is “the director’s right-hand man prior to performance. They keep track of rehearsal schedules, scripts, props, and actors during the rehearsal process. Once the run of the show has begun, the Stage Manager is in control of everything that happens backstage or onstage.” As Will Smith would say, “I gotta get me one of those!” Unfortunately, three weeks before opening night is not the time to be shopping for a stage manager!

I think I suffer from a rather typical female attitude that “I can just do it myself.” I really hate to put anyone out, so I’ll just go ahead and handle it…how bad can it be, really? I also think that, prior to the last couple of rehearsals, I had forgotten what last year was like, as we neared the end of the rehearsal stage. I had forgotten how much information has to be written down and given to the cast and crew; meetings that need to occur; music that needs to be decided on; props and set furniture that need to be purchased or borrowed…now it’s all hit me in the face and I’m kind of reeling from the stupidity that caused me to decide, back in May or June, that I could handle it again without an SM.

So…what am I going to do? Well, to be honest, I don’t think there’s anything much I can do. A stage manager needs to work with the director from the start, in order to have a real understanding of the director’s vision. He or she needs to have kept careful track of all the entrances and exits, the movements on stage, in a special copy of the script called a prompt book. Using that prompt book, the SM then “calls the show,” or manages the production from backstage during the entire run of the play…while the director sits in the audience and calmly watches her baby (the production, or…the 24 babies in the cast that have grown up over 10 weeks) do it all on their own.

So, is there any good news in this particular post?  Actually, yes, there is.  I have two parents who have volunteered to be backstage managers during the performances, so as long as I have a clear script for them to follow (a prompt book that I’m going to try to create from the jumble of notes in my own script), they will do a wonderful job of keeping everything moving. One of these kind ladies managed backstage last year for me, and the other did the same for her husband’s production of And Then There Were None that our troupe did this past spring.  I know the show is in capable hands!

In addition, I have a responsible props crew, ready and willing to do my bidding with regards to transporting, setting up, organizing, packing up, etc., etc., all the props and furniture we’ll be using in the show. And did you see the picture I put in at the beginning of this post? This gorgeous photo was taken by Petruchio’s dad, a former professional photographer, who is doing all of our photography this year for free (yes, he does have a vested interest in this production, with two sons in the show, but he would have done it anyway, I’m sure!).

Today we had our first run-through of the entire play with no scripts…everyone had to be off-book.  It was scary and stressful for us all, and was a good way to light a fire under the kids who simply are not ready yet (that would be most of them, by the way).  But as the kids were stumbling through their lines, one of my backstage managers was there, giving them needed line-prompts, through the entire three-hour rehearsal.  My point is that despite the fact that I made a big mistake by not getting an SM for this production, I do know that it will all work out.  Yes, it will be a more stressful three weeks for me than it needed to be, but I definitely think I’ve learned my lesson.  And the wonderful thing is that I know the parents are there for me, ready and willing to help all they can to make this a successful experience for their kids and for the school.

A recent item again resuscitated the debates about Shakespeare’s authorship. What set this article apart from the usual blurbs was its focus on the angle of celebrity endorsements. In other words, the article name-dropped famous folks like Freud and Welles as notable non-believers. The author gave particular attention to Mark Twain whose 1909 humorous pamphlet, “Is Shakespeare Dead?” was quoted within the article. What struck me was the notion that an argument could be given strength simply based on who agrees with it.

The timeliness of this approach to the authorship debate parallels the current political climate. As we rapidly approach the conventions and the fall elections, it seems as though every celebrity is picking a side. In both Shakespearean scholarship and politics, which kinds of celebrities are most useful? It seems as though there is a curious dichotomy in both: expertise versus fame. Politicians and Shakespeare experts have insider status and clearly know their stuff, but I’m not convinced of their power to sway the average person. Actors and musicians are repeatedly written off as bimbos and political dilettantes, yet their name recognition might resonate better with someone who is not an expert in either field. Mr. Twain’s ironic question still resonates, though perhaps Shakespeare’s name should be put in quotation marks. The follow-up question is whether or not his lack of endorsement still resonates today. In certain circles, it certainly would; in others, it might prompt the question, “Is Mark Twain dead?”

Like many playwrights, Shakespeare’s work has been adapted and updated numerous times, both within his art form and in others. A review of the ballet Romeo and Juliet, highlighted the ways in which adaptations can differ from the original and change our understanding of it. In this version of the tale, the young lovers live at the end. While this may seems surprising for those of us used to the whole poison-and-dagger finale, the reviewer also noted other dramatic versions of the story in which Romeo and Juliet still have a pulse at the curtain call. One version he highlighted was a play by the great Spanish playwright Lope de Vega, who drew on the same source material as Shakespeare. In this play, Romeo and his gal also duck the grim reaper in the last scene.

Lope de Vega’s version creates an interesting quandary. Since he uses the same source material, we cannot exactly accuse him of bastardizing Shakespeare (as we could with the seventeenth- and eighteenth-century playwrights whose “adaptations” saved most of the original text and simply tacked on a happy ending). How does the story change if the lovers we think of as doomed are given a reprieve? In simpler terms, is the story as good if they don’t die? Part of the issue is that the story is famous as a tragedy, not as an almost-tragedy, so we must try to remove that expectation (if that’s even possible). Besides, the two youngsters do experience losses along the way, so those of us hankering for suffering (come on, you know you’re out there) can still get our fix.